# [MATURE] Why Are Breasts So Taboo?



## Kabigon (Mar 11, 2009)

In my English class today, our teacher asked us to write on a sheet of paper and put in a hat a list of really unnecessary taboos.

I was gonna put something about Rite of Passages but one of my female friends   put something about nipples in today's media in as half dare and half seriousness. To our surprise, the teacher called on hers and we both had red faces because everyone knew I had dared her. But then our teacher started _talking_ about it (she's female so we were _somewhat_ comfortable). 

She was saying things like, "What are so bad about nipples? If anything they have life giving nutrients that helps new mommies feed their babies so they can grow stronger. As babies, most of us sucked on one to get milk. The milk contains antibodies to help the newborns immune system. And also, males have them too. As a matter of fact, they are one of the few sexual things that are the same for a man and a woman."

I just want to point out that you can't say anything about the breasts (even though I used that in the title) because television has no problems showing men squawking at them. Only in America are things so heavily guarded. If you were too look in Africa, you can see women breast feeding their babies in public and when asked about them, they'll just say "So American men act like babies"? 


I was going to add more to this but I'll just add it later if this topic lives that long. I also don't mean to offend anyone.


----------



## Tailsy (Mar 11, 2009)

You can't handle the squish.


----------



## Kabigon (Mar 11, 2009)

I lol'd. 

I've always wanted to know this. What exactly is so wrong about them?

It's just like trying to keep your kids protected from sexual education. I think it's better at a young age cause if you have the internet in the house or at a friends house your kids are going to find out about sex one way or another. Might as well start when they are young.

P.S. I live for the squish.


----------



## #1 bro (Mar 11, 2009)

Unless we start posting pictures, this isn't really "[MATURE]", is it? :\

But, yeah, uh, I agree, and most people on this forum probably do too...


----------



## Kabigon (Mar 11, 2009)

Actually I don't even know why that MATURE tag is there. I just put it there.


----------



## Alexi (Mar 11, 2009)

We need to see more nipples on TV *nodnod*


----------



## Felidire (Mar 11, 2009)

The squish frightens me ;ֻ;

lol, I don't really know why it's taboo, but I know i'd personally rather see women walking around with clothing on, as opposed to everyone being topless. ,xP

..That's probably how it became such a taboo in the first place. I mean, if people suddenly had no problem with it at all, then what percentage of women do you think would leave those parts exposed? A very low percentage, most likely. That's probably due to self-consciousness, hence most people cover up, hence seeing that stuff becomes incredibly rare, and.. I guess it's pretty self explanatory. x3




> Only in America are things so heavily guarded. If you were too look in Africa, you can see women breast feeding their babies in public and when asked about them, they'll just say "So American men act like babies"?


It wouldn't just be america, i'm sure there's dozens of other countries who share the same view.. and I fail to see how it's just men, women in our coutnries (with young children) probably wouldn't want their kids seeing that either. Lots of places and countries are different as well, like in Africa they might not care about breasts or nipples, but then they might do random shit like this.


----------



## DonKarasuMan (Mar 11, 2009)

I always thought that anything sexually stimulating would be regarded as taboo.


----------



## Vladimir Putin's LJ (Mar 11, 2009)

DonKarasuMan said:


> I always thought that anything sexually stimulating would be regarded as taboo.


That's what I was thinking too but men take off their shirts very often, especially when doing construction or during the summer and such.
Men's chests are quite stimulating to a lot of people, albeit less than women's chests I suppose?

I don't know, public breast-feeding isn't a very big deal around here and I've often seen women tanning topless on the beach in Holland. I guess it depends on where you live.

I'm pretty neutral since breasts are normal and I don't care about them either way so women can do what they want with them really.
I'll try expressing my point at a later hour, it's five in the morning here :v


----------



## Storm Earth and Fire (Mar 11, 2009)

Vladimir Putin's LJ said:


> That's what I was thinking too but men take off their shirts very often, especially when doing construction or during the summer and such.
> Men's chests are quite stimulating to a lot of people, albeit less than women's chests I suppose?


I believe that could be linked to the formation of gender roles many, many millenia ago.


			
				Vladimir Putin's LJ said:
			
		

> I've often seen women tanning topless on the beach in Holland. I guess it depends on where you live.


Definitely true... The only place in the States you could really get away with toplessness at the beach would be some sections of Miami beach.


----------



## Kabigon (Mar 11, 2009)

Although I'm not saying everyone to go topless, it's kind of getting irritating to be watching television and they show one and it seems to grow "fuzzy mold". 

What I mean is that in America, everyone is so protective over their children. I mean, for the love of everything, cursing is banned. I mean, it's not like they are keeping children from saying bad words or looking at nude women. If it wasn't so rare then it really wouldn't be as big as a problem with porn.

And I think in Europe, you can go to nude beaches and real live models walk down the cat walk with them exposed. Although I may be wrong. If they weren't so taboo then stuff would be like this.

Two children reading a porn magazine.

Child: Wow look at those nipples
Child 2: That's not what we're looking at you spaz. You can see a nipple on television at anytime.

It would be something like that I would think.


----------



## Felidire (Mar 11, 2009)

Although there's nothing inherently wrong with it, I do think that things are the way they are, for the better.



This might sound strange, but it's got me curious.. How many guys here would date/get married to a girl, who walked around in public places with no upper-clothing on, on a regular basis? ,xD

To me, it goes way beyond self-consciousness, or the fact on whether or not it's a taboo.


----------



## .GoreTuzk (Mar 11, 2009)

Stryke said:


> And I think in Europe, you can go to nude beaches and real live models walk down the cat walk with them exposed. Although I may be wrong. If they weren't so taboo then stuff would be like this.


Yes, topless in beaches is quite common here, during the summer.

@Felidire: I would, it's not like she walks naked through the streets, but if she wants to tan her breasts, who am I to object? It's not like a bikini doesn't give a revealing enough idea.


----------



## Minish (Mar 11, 2009)

I've always wondered why the media are okay with revealing pretty much ALL of a woman's breasts _except_ the nipple. Does the nipple suddenly make it controversial? o_0;

I wish the UK was more comfortable a nation so topless women in beaches wouldn't be seen as weird (and probably chucked off the beach or something).


----------



## Tarvos (Mar 11, 2009)

it's because goddamn there are too many old women with tits you don't wanna see


----------



## opaltiger (Mar 11, 2009)

> How many guys here would date/get married to a girl, who walked around in public places with no upper-clothing on, on a regular basis? ,xD


sure?


----------



## goldenquagsire (Mar 11, 2009)

what irritates me more than anything is the double-standard. i could be more understanding if both mens' and womens' nipples were taboo, but apparently on women it's so much more evil. after all, i have never once seen mantits been blurred out on camera. :/


----------



## @lex (Mar 11, 2009)

The question that should be answered is maybe: why are breasts so arousing? What makes them so? 

I mean, seriously, what's so fun about them? <:o If they weren't, they probably wouldn't be taboo :<


----------



## Alexi (Mar 11, 2009)

Going with that train of thought, then feet should also be taboo, since foot fetishes are relatively common.


----------



## Minish (Mar 11, 2009)

Alexi said:


> Going with that train of thought, then feet should also be taboo, since foot fetishes are relatively common.


But then we aren't raised to practically _fear_ the sight of feet. I seriously thought when I was a kid that breasts and penises damaged your eyesight if you stared at them too long because of how much they seemed like taboo. XD


----------



## goldenquagsire (Mar 11, 2009)

> The question that should be answered is maybe: why are breasts so arousing? What makes them so?
> 
> I mean, seriously, what's so fun about them?


I can't really answer that. I just find them arousing. Others prefer feet, yet others prefer arses. It's all down to the individual, really.


----------



## Mirry (Mar 11, 2009)

I dislike the double-standard about nipples too. :3 Men's nipples and women's nipples seem pretty similar to me, so I don't see why we should be allowed to look at one and not the other without being considered "dirty".

A woman who walks around topless on a regular basis shouldn't be viewed any differently than a man who walks around topless, in my opinion. The only difference between these two situations is that our mothers taught us that women's nipples are naughty for some unknown reason.


----------



## Dannichu (Mar 11, 2009)

The thing that amuses me is that in the media, naked humans (and, indeed, semi-naked women) are protrayed as ugly, taboo things, but if it's related to art or culture, nobody really cares. Sure, if you show a bunch of 12-year-old boys a picture of Venus De Milo or God creating Adam and they'll probably laugh at it, but normal, mature people just don't care. 
I'll never understand why women can't breast-feed in public; it's really quite disgusting to force women who breastfeed their babies to go to public toilets in order to do so. There's nothing sexual about it, and, believe it or not, that's what breasts are actually there for, so I don't get the big deal.


----------



## goldenquagsire (Mar 11, 2009)

Dannichu said:


> Sure, if you show a bunch of 12-year-old boys a picture of Venus De Milo or God creating Adam and they'll probably laugh at it, but normal, mature people just don't care.


Wow, Adam was certainly not, ahem, well-endowed. xD



> I'll never understand why women can't breast-feed in public; it's really quite disgusting to force women who breastfeed their babies to go to public toilets in order to do so. There's nothing sexual about it, and, believe it or not, that's what breasts are actually there for, so I don't get the big deal.


That's kinda shitty. I swear, even in Europe they're cool with breastfeeding in public.


----------



## Mirry (Mar 11, 2009)

Also in the camp that finds it ridiculous that women are told to be ashamed of utilizing their breasts for what they're there for. X_X The argument that breasts are "sexually arousing" is silly. If you find a woman breastfeeding her child sexually arousing, you should probably re-examine your definition of "sexy". :3


----------



## #1 bro (Mar 11, 2009)

DonKarasuMan said:


> I always thought that anything sexually stimulating would be regarded as taboo.


right so that's why bikinis are illegal/taboo


----------



## Vladimir Putin's LJ (Mar 11, 2009)

Zeta Reticuli said:


> right so that's why bikinis are illegal/taboo


the sexiness of bikinis on beaches or near pools is cancelled out by that one fat chick with the micro-bikini, the one who forgot to shave or wash. you know.


----------



## Lucas₇₅₅ (Mar 11, 2009)

If women walked around topless, everyone would get horny.

But I supposed what VPLJ said applies here.


----------



## Vladimir Putin's LJ (Mar 11, 2009)

Lucas755 said:


> If women walked around topless, everyone would get horny.


What about those really old ladies with boobs down to their knees or morbidly obese birds and stuff


----------



## Kabigon (Mar 11, 2009)

Lucas755 said:


> If women walked around topless, everyone would get horny.
> 
> But I supposed what VPLJ said applies here.


Yeah but it's always fun to look at something we don't see everyday you know. If they were more common, I would assume it wouldn't be as bad.

You could probably chop off the nipple and someone would still probably still have a problem about the scar or something.

VPLJ: You're right, that would be kind of freaky but then again, it's still even weird on grandpa.


----------



## Felidire (Mar 11, 2009)

goldenquagsire said:


> Wow, Adam was certainly not, ahem, well-endowed. xD


Hahaha~ ..oops!
*inner 12-year-old* ,x3


----------



## ultraviolet (Mar 12, 2009)

> Wow, Adam was certainly not, ahem, well-endowed. xD


Sorry, my inner art student is kicking in. 

Particularly in that time period (the Renaissance) artists took influences from ancient Roman art and architecture to break away from Middle Ages art. The Renaissance was probably the first time in modern history that the human body was able to be seen as beautiful (as oppsed to the 'we are lesser, imperfect beings of God'), particularly in religious scenes, which is why there are so many nudes from the Renaissance. It was about the everyday person being beautiful or a religious figure. 
That being said, in Roman times penis size was a fairly different issue to what it is now - large penis size was considered humorous (attributed to lesser beings, such as satyrs, who only ever had sex or got pissed) and derogative, while small penis size was superior. Presumably that attitude was transferred through to the Renaissance because art that they took influence from depicted noble figures with small penises. 

Why are breasts taboo? I guess they're sort of considered genitalia by society, and flashing those in public is a no-no. I dunno, I wouldn't really have a problem with it, but I'm not about to go around topless.
People who think breastfeeding in public is bad should try and raise a baby sometime. It's disgusting to think that something like breastfeeding should be censored - if you don't want to see it, don't look at it, and there really isn't any reason to protect children from breastfeeding.


----------



## Kabigon (Mar 12, 2009)

ultraviolet said:


> Sorry, my inner art student is kicking in.
> 
> Particularly in that time period (the Renaissance) artists took influences from ancient Roman art and architecture to break away from Middle Ages art. The Renaissance was probably the first time in modern history that the human body was able to be seen as beautiful (as oppsed to the 'we are lesser, imperfect beings of God'), particularly in religious scenes, which is why there are so many nudes from the Renaissance. It was about the everyday person being beautiful or a religious figure.
> That being said, in Roman times penis size was a fairly different issue to what it is now - large penis size was considered humorous (attributed to lesser beings, such as satyrs, who only ever had sex or got pissed) and derogative, while small penis size was superior. Presumably that attitude was transferred through to the Renaissance because art that they took influence from depicted noble figures with small penises.
> ...


Then: Good time where everyone is pretty smart, and were concerned about religion and art, poetry etc.
Now: Sex: that's pretty much it. No wonder no one is really happy.

Yeah they are right, don't look at it. Although breastfeeding in certain places might be a little weird where you have to focus on something such as church, college, etc.


----------



## Vladimir Putin's LJ (Mar 12, 2009)

Stryke said:


> Then: Good time where everyone is pretty smart, and were concerned about religion and art, poetry etc.
> Now: Sex: that's pretty much it. No wonder no one is really happy.


Try then: time when you got killed for contesting the church, being gay or being a 'witch'. Great art stemmed from the Renaissance but it wasn't sunshine-rainbows-kittens since the church completely fucked up Italy and Greece, amongst others.



> Yeah they are right, don't look at it. Although breastfeeding in certain places might be a little weird where you have to focus on something such as church, college, etc.


I don't see what's special about breastfeeding in church or on campus.


----------



## #1 bro (Mar 12, 2009)

goldenquagsire said:


> Wow, Adam was certainly not, ahem, well-endowed. xD


haha that's right and you know...

god made adam in his own image :)


----------



## Kabigon (Mar 13, 2009)

Vladimir Putin's LJ said:


> Try then: time when you got killed for contesting the church, being gay or being a 'witch'. Great art stemmed from the Renaissance but it wasn't sunshine-rainbows-kittens since the church completely fucked up Italy and Greece, amongst others.
> 
> 
> I don't see what's special about breastfeeding in church or on campus.


Wasn't that during the 15 hundreds?

Nothing's wrong with it, it's a little distracting. Like it kind of ruins the seriousness of the moment.


----------



## ultraviolet (Mar 13, 2009)

VPLJ said:
			
		

> Try then: time when you got killed for contesting the church, being gay or being a 'witch'. Great art stemmed from the Renaissance but it wasn't sunshine-rainbows-kittens since the church completely fucked up Italy and Greece, amongst others.


This is true actually, and I don't think women were allowed to be much more than sluts or pretty women - unless you were of working class. But, the renaissance produced some good things, too - like the invention of biology, anatomy and lots of mechanical stuff. This is also when people started getting interested in the world outside of the world (space) and the world around them. The Renaissance was a good period of learning and art, but only men did that stuff (I mean, one of the most famous women of that period was Simonetta Vespucci, and she was a mistress/modelled for painters). 



			
				Stryke said:
			
		

> Wasn't that during the 15 hundreds?
> 
> Nothing's wrong with it, it's a little distracting. Like it kind of ruins the seriousness of the moment.


The European Renaissance was loosely between the 12th and 17th centuries. Basically there was an early Renaissance in the 12th century, and then it was revived again in the 14th century, lasting until the 17th century. This is the best-known period, with Leonardo Da Vinci and Botticelli (i.e. _The Birth of Venus_).

...how does breastfeeding ruin the seriousness of anything? It's feeding a baby. Why shouldn't a mother feed her children in a church of God, if she's religious? Or at a university, an area of learning? It's not as easy as 'oh, well I'll just feed my baby somewhere else', it's 'the baby is crying, I have to feed him _now_.'


----------



## goldenquagsire (Mar 13, 2009)

> Nothing's wrong with it, it's a little distracting. Like it kind of ruins the seriousness of the moment.


People fart in college. If anything, that's even less acceptable than breastfeeding, since it's not necessary for the welfare of another human (e.g. the baby).

Also lol, since when has college been serious? :P


----------



## Zhorken (Mar 14, 2009)

Felidire said:


> This might sound strange, but it's got me curious.. How many guys here would date/get married to a girl, who walked around in public places with no upper-clothing on, on a regular basis? ,xD


Sure, why not?  o.O

(For the record, it's legal here.  One of the few things we're doing right.)


----------



## Dannichu (Mar 14, 2009)

Yeah, but legal and socially acceptable are two radically different things.


----------



## Gardevoir Girl (Mar 14, 2009)

IMO, if girls have to cover the top half, guys should have to as well.


----------



## Vladimir Putin's LJ (Mar 14, 2009)

Gardevoir Girl said:


> IMO, if girls have to cover the top half, guys should have to as well.


nooooo my eyecandy



> Wasn't that during the 15 hundreds?


The Renaissance wasn't limited to the 16th century.



> This is true actually, and I don't think women were allowed to be much more than sluts or pretty women - unless you were of working class. But, the renaissance produced some good things, too - like the invention of biology, anatomy and lots of mechanical stuff. This is also when people started getting interested in the world outside of the world (space) and the world around them. The Renaissance was a good period of learning and art, but only men did that stuff (I mean, one of the most famous women of that period was Simonetta Vespucci, and she was a mistress/modelled for painters).


Obviously, I'm not saying the Renaissance didn't bring any good things. That would be very stupid.
Biology and anatomy weren't invented during the 16th century, but it's true that they were looked at a lot closer due to the increasingly secular mindset of, well, everyone. A good example, perhaps the perfect example, of the Renaissance Man was indeed Leonardo, for his incredible contributions to biology, engineering, art and so on.
The interest in space actually began during the 13th century but it really got going in the 15th/16th, so it's a very 'Renaissance' concept, indeed.

Our art teacher told us about this fantastic woman painter who lived during the late Renaissance, but I can't for the life of me remember her name. She was raped and when her artistic career got started she did a very strong painting of a scene, featuring her holding the severed head of the man who'd abused her.
I'm not sure whether she actually ever killed him, but I don't think so. I'll see if I can ask my teacher what her name was.


----------



## opaltiger (Mar 14, 2009)

> Biology and anatomy weren't invented during the 16th century, but it's true that they were looked at a lot closer due to the increasingly secular mindset of, well, everyone.


I would argue that biology as an independent science (as opposed to botany, anatomy, and others we now group together as biology) didn't really appear until the nineteenth century, after Darwin's work.


----------



## Doctor Jimmy (Mar 14, 2009)

Breasts and nipples are so sexually attractive _because _they are taboo. See, society treats them as something bad (why, I don't know). Because humans are such curious beings, though, they seek what is hidden by society. Take porn, for example. It isn't sold in much places except for adult video stores, yet people still desire it. If it's harder to get, the rewards for getting it are so much greater. Like winning a sports competition: winning is a challenge, but it's also an accomplishment. Same with porn, and same with nipples. Because it's a rare event, seeing them in public is much more arousing and rewarding than simply having everyone topless.

Take the French Quarter in New Orleans as an example. Toplessness is a common thing there; from drunk women in the streets, to street performers, it's kind of accepted in society. I've seen venders selling t-shirts with topless women on them, and proudly displaying them in the streets. I've also seen some people with tattoos of women with breasts. I assume it comes from the culture of the Renaissance in France, although it could be that everyone's just too drunk to notice the extra clevage.

The point is, if nipples are accepted in society, it won't be a taboo anymore.

Breastfeeding in public should be a right, not a privelage. It's a necessity to keeping babies alive and healthy, and anyone in government who wants public breastfeeding to be banned should have my left tit shoved up their ass.


----------



## ultraviolet (Mar 17, 2009)

> She was raped and when her artistic career got started she did a very strong painting of a scene, featuring her holding the severed head of the man who'd abused her.
> I'm not sure whether she actually ever killed him, but I don't think so. I'll see if I can ask my teacher what her name was.


I remember hearing something about that! I can't remember her name either, but I'll be sure to look it up because now it's driving me_ crazy!_


----------



## Storm Earth and Fire (Mar 17, 2009)

Doctor Jimmy said:


> Breasts and nipples are so sexually attractive _because _they are taboo.


Well, I suspect it goes back millenia, before we were even that intelligent. Healthy breasts signalled to a male that the female would be able to take care of their offspring. Thusly, that female is a good mate. We probably hide them because somehow, most likely through the evolution of gender roles that stacked the deck against women, we're more likely to associate breasts with, well, physical/sexual attractiveness. Men are like that.

This thread is so worthless without pics.


----------



## Vladimir Putin's LJ (Mar 17, 2009)

I think that sure, something may be attractive because it's taboo, but I'm pretty sure it became taboo because it's sexually stimulating and not the opposite.
Because sex scares the shit out of people for some reason.


----------



## Jetx (Mar 17, 2009)

Gardevoir Girl said:


> IMO, if girls have to cover the top half, guys should have to as well.


it's better to work on adding freedoms than it is to work on taking them away.


----------



## Storm Earth and Fire (Mar 17, 2009)

Vladimir Putin's LJ said:


> I think that sure, something may be attractive because it's taboo, but I'm pretty sure it became taboo because it's sexually stimulating and not the opposite.
> Because sex scares the shit out of people for some reason.


Well put. ^_^


----------



## Harlequin (Mar 17, 2009)

Boobs are taboo?


----------



## Zhorken (Mar 18, 2009)

Breasts are only sexual to me on people I'm interested in who are interested in me.  I find pretty much every part of the body arousing, really, but unless I know you well, chances are I won't find any part of your body sexual at all.  This includes boobs; when I see a woman going about topless in public, I go "wooo topfreedom" but I'm not even tempted to take a good look at her breasts.  They're just... not sexual because she's not sexual.  I don't gawk at or even care about feet or midriffs or what have you either except on people I already like who know that I like them and are okay with it.

If someone shows interest back, though, the person's suddenly sexual and I will be interested in their body.

EDIT: 





Dannichu said:


> Yeah, but legal and socially acceptable are two radically different things.


Oh, I know.  Our topfreedom "has been [legally] tested and upheld several times", so obviously there _are_ people challenging it, but the fact that it is (and remains, despite challenge) legal does show that society, at least here, is at least somewhat accepting of it.

EDIT2: naked cyclists always have the best body paint I swear.


----------



## Felidire (Mar 19, 2009)

I agree with you, but the majority of guys are just mindless, insensetive assholes, so unfortinately our opinions/views don't count. </3 Until literally everyone thinks in this way, they're always gonna be taboo.


----------



## FMC_x_ANS (Mar 19, 2009)

It is due to Judeo-Christian ethics. Remember that America was founded originally by Christian fundamentalists.


----------



## Vladimir Putin's LJ (Mar 19, 2009)

In most places in Europe we're pretty secular but it's still not PC to rock out with your tits out.


----------



## opaltiger (Mar 19, 2009)

FMC_x_ANS said:


> It is due to Judeo-Christian ethics. Remember that America was founded originally by Christian fundamentalists.


No it wasn't. Assuming you mean the independent country, it was founded by a bunch of people with lots of different beliefs, including quite a few (notable) deists and agnostics.


----------



## Tarvos (Mar 19, 2009)

jefferson and madison and co. hated the church lol


----------

